Welcome to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) today released a statement condemning the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) following the agency’s approval of a rule to allow the E-rate program to support Wi-Fi hotspots for use off school property.  “This expansion of E-rate funding to cover off school property violates federal law and will result in taxpayer dollars subsidizing children’s unsupervised internet access while failing to improve learning outcomes for children. Furthermore, the E-rate program is notorious for overbuilding and other wasteful spending. Rather than take steps to address the existing problems with the E-rate program, the FCC is doubling down to advance Chairwoman Rosenworcel’s pet projects. The FCC should instead be working with Congress to advance its policy goals.”  On July 31, 2023 , Chair Rodgers and Senate Commerce Committee Ranking Member Ted Cruz (R-TX) sent a letter to Chairwoman Rosenworcel expressing their opposition to her proposal to vastly expand the E-Rate program.  On September 28, 2023 , Chair Rodgers and Senator Cruz sent a letter to the then newly sworn-in FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez urging her to oppose FCC Chairwoman Rosenworcel's plan to expand the E-rate program beyond school classrooms and libraries. 

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chair Bob Latta (R-OH) today sent National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) Administrator Alan Davidson a letter demanding an explanation for the Agency’s repeated failures to respond to questions for the record (QFRs) in a timely manner. Congress has a responsibility to conduct oversight of the executive branch, and the NTIA’s failure to be responsive and transparent undermines our system of checks and balances. KEY LETTER EXCERPT: “We expect NTIA to take seriously our oversight efforts and respond to QFRs and letters promptly. After the hearing on December 5, 2023, it took you 107 days to submit your answers to the QFRs, far exceeding the 2-week deadline. “We received answers to QFRs from the December oversight hearing on the same day that we announced the May NTIA oversight hearing. It is unacceptable that in order to receive responses to QFRs from an oversight hearing, we must introduce more oversight activity.” The Chairs requested answers to the following questions:   During our May 15, 2024, oversight hearing, when questioned about the untimeliness of NTIA’s responses, you said, “I don't know all the details about why each of those took so long, and I would be happy to get back to you. I think the process of writing the QFRs were quite lengthy.” Please describe the process of drafting QFR responses. During that same hearing, you also said “We have to get them [(responses to QFRs)] all cleared through a complex internal interagency process, and that often slows us down.” Please explain each of the steps in this process. How can this interagency process be adjusted to ensure that NTIA responds promptly to the Committee’s requests? CLICK HERE to read the full letter.

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Innovation, Data, and Commerce Subcommittee Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) today announced a hearing titled “The Fiscal Year 2025 Consumer Product Safety Commission Budget.” “The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has a long history of important, bipartisan work that has helped raise the standard of safety for the goods that people utilize every single day from infant sleeping products to home improvement supplies. More recently, however, the Biden administration has been pushing the CPSC away from its core safety mission towards a radical rush to green agenda, prioritizing actions like banning gas-powered appliances, which millions of households rely on,” said Chairs Rodgers and Bilirakis. “We look forward to hearing from CPSC Chair Hoehn-Saric and the other Commissioners and discussing how we can return the agency to focusing on its intended mission of keeping the American people safe.” Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce hearing titled “The Fiscal Year 2025 Consumer Product Safety Commission Budget.” WHAT: Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce hearing to discuss President Biden’s FY 2025 budget request for the Consumer Product Safety Commission. DATE: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 TIME: 2:00 PM ET LOCATION: 2123 Rayburn House Office Building WITNESSES: Hon. Alexander Hoehn-Saric, Chair, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission   Hon. Peter A. Feldman, Commissioner, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission   Hon. Richard Trumka Jr., Commissioner, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission   Hon. Mary T. Boyle, Commissioner, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission   Hon. Douglas Dziak, Commissioner, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission This notice is at the direction of the Chair. The hearing will be open to the public and press and will be live streamed online at https://energycommerce.house.gov/ . If you have any questions concerning the hearing, please contact Alex Khlopin at Alex.Khlopin@mail.house.gov . If you have any press-related questions, please contact Sean Kelly at Sean.Kelly@mail.house.gov . 

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chair Bob Latta (R-OH) today sent National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) Administrator Alan Davidson a letter demanding an explanation for the Agency’s repeated failures to respond to questions for the record (QFRs) in a timely manner. Congress has a responsibility to conduct oversight of the executive branch, and the NTIA’s failure to be responsive and transparent undermines our system of checks and balances. KEY LETTER EXCERPT: “We expect NTIA to take seriously our oversight efforts and respond to QFRs and letters promptly. After the hearing on December 5, 2023, it took you 107 days to submit your answers to the QFRs, far exceeding the 2-week deadline. “We received answers to QFRs from the December oversight hearing on the same day that we announced the May NTIA oversight hearing. It is unacceptable that in order to receive responses to QFRs from an oversight hearing, we must introduce more oversight activity.” The Chairs requested answers to the following questions:   During our May 15, 2024, oversight hearing, when questioned about the untimeliness of NTIA’s responses, you said, “I don't know all the details about why each of those took so long, and I would be happy to get back to you. I think the process of writing the QFRs were quite lengthy.” Please describe the process of drafting QFR responses. During that same hearing, you also said “We have to get them [(responses to QFRs)] all cleared through a complex internal interagency process, and that often slows us down.” Please explain each of the steps in this process. How can this interagency process be adjusted to ensure that NTIA responds promptly to the Committee’s requests? CLICK HERE to read the full letter.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Oversight and Acoountability Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) sent letters to eight federal agencies today following the recent Supreme Court decision on Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo , in which the court overruled Chevron deference. Science, Space, and Technology Committee Chair Frank Lucas (R-OK) and House Agriculture Committee Chair GT Thompson (R-PA) joined Chairs Rodgers and Comer on an additional letter sent to the Environmental Protection Agency. KEY LETTER EXCERPT: “We write to call to your attention Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, a recent Supreme Court decision that precludes courts from deferring to agency interpretations when the statutes are ambiguous. In its decision, the Court explicitly overruled Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), which required deference to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes. By allowing such deference, the Court in Chevron enabled the ‘Administrative State’ to usurp the legislative authority that the Constitution grants exclusively to Congress in Article I. The Chevron decision led to broader, more costly and more invasive agency regulation of Americans’ lives, liberty, and property.   “Perhaps no administration has gone as far as President Biden’s in issuing sweeping Executive edicts based on questionable assertions of agency authority. The Biden administration has promulgated far more major rules, imposing vast costs and paperwork burdens, than either its most recent predecessors. Many of these rules...have been based on overreaching interpretations of statutes enacted by Congress years ago, before the issues now regulated were even imagined.   “The expansive Chevron deference has undermined our system of government, creating an unaccountable Administrative State. Thankfully, the Court has now corrected this pattern, reaffirming that ‘[i]t is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.’ Given the Biden administration’s record of agency overreach, we are compelled to underscore the implications of Loper Bright and remind you of the limitations it has set on your authority.”   CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Environmental Protection Agency. CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Federal Communications Commission.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Consumer Product Safety Commission.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Federal Trade Commission.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to Department of Commerce.   CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Department of Energy.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to the National Highway Transportation and Safety Administration.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Subcommittee Chair Buddy Carter (R-GA) sent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan a letter demanding additional details regarding the agency’s efforts to designate additional per- and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) substances as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). KEY LETTER EXCERPT: “We are particularly concerned with the scope of any new designations made by EPA, including the EPA’s ability to obtain and use the data necessary to understand the technical and economic feasibility of such a designation. “The Agency’s purposeful cooperation with scientific experts, who know these substances, is relevant to the cleanup levels for which those sites might be subject and will, ultimately, determine how quickly these sites will be cleaned up under CERCLA’s strict, joint and several, and retroactive liability scheme. For these reasons, it is imperative this Committee follow up with you and seek additional information about the potential scope of additional actions under CERCLA to address PFAS releases.”   BACKGROUND: PFAS are not a single chemical, but rather an entire group of 14,000 synthetic chemicals used in a wide variety of common applications.   On April 17, 2024, the EPA designated two PFAS substances, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), as “hazardous substances” under CERCLA.   During Administrator Regan’s appearance before the Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials, he was asked if the EPA would designate PFAS substances beyond PFOA and PFOS as “hazardous substances.” In response, he stated, ��We will.” Later, the EPA stated the agency “will go through a rulemaking process” for the designation of additional PFAS chemicals as CERCLA hazardous substances.  Given that PFOA and PFOS are just a fraction of the entire PFAS class, the Chairs are demanding details regarding the EPA’s efforts to designate additional PFAS chemicals as hazardous substances under CERCLA, and whether they will be transparent with the public regarding those efforts. CLICK HERE to read the full letter.